Social Interactions among Older Adults Who Wish for Death
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sylvie Bernier DPsa, Sylvie Lapierre PhD*a & Sophie Desjardins PhDaa Department of psychology, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, CanadaCONTACT Sylvie Lapierre Sylvie.Lapierre@uqtr.ca Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, 3351 des Forges, Trois-Rivières, QC G9A5H7, CanadaAuthor NoteThis work is part of the first author’s doctoral dissertation, carried out under the supervision of the second author.ABSTRACTObjectives: When the need for relatedness is frustrated, some older adults feel that life is not worth living and wish for death (WD). The aim of this study was to look at the perception of social interactions among older adults who express the WD.Methods: A probabilistic sample of 2787 French-speaking community-dwelling older adults aged 65 to 96 years (M = 73.8) took part in the Seniors Health Survey, a study on the prevalence of mental disorders which also collected information on various demographic and social variables.Results: Results showed that 5% of participants expressed WD. Participants who WD felt significantly more isolated and in conflict with their children than participants without WD. When sociodemographic variables, self-rated physical health, and depression were controlled, three social variables predicted WD in a logistic regression: being distant toward others, dissatisfaction with social life, and a lack of participation in organizations.Conclusions: Results of the present study support the interpersonal theory of suicide, which suggests that self-reported thwarted belongingness can foster WD.Clinical implications: Clinicians should consider social dissatisfaction and withdrawal as risk factors for WD and design interventions that foster social skills or meaningful connections.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".